Comments

Rich comments from someone who not so long ago told students holding opposing ideas to his to quit the university he runs! Well done, Mr Patten, yet another perfect example of what a hypercritical political scum you are! Read more

Setting limits, deciding which ideas constitute anathema will serve no purpose. No idea can incite violence and discord unless accepted by the people. Assuming that university is comprised of educated and rational beings, it should not be an issue to discuss topics such as racial hatred and likes, because these can then be refuted and dealt with in an orderly debate. Only through debates can such controversial issues be dealt with, for the dissenters can then have their flawed thinking tested and questioned, which will make them ever more ready to accept the other side of the argument. Read more

Is this Academic? Or is it Pragmatic? Or is it Nonsense?https://www.academia.edu/12823841/Mathematical_Model_and_Simulation_for_A_Partnership_for_Development_with_the_United_States_of_America_-_December_1999Read more

How can we expect universities to have true freedom of speech and promte the clash of ideas as long as they continue fighting, using any possible means, those professors, researshers and ideas that go against the so-called "the theory of evolution". Read more

Mr Craven: I'm not trying to obscure my intent. I am a Muslim, therefore, I am a creationist. What I see, is a extreme intolerant fanatic new religion that simply obliges and imposes on people in the West what should be taught in public schools to young children.By the way, In Saudi Arabia, it is not banned by the law to teach what Darwinism is about as stated in western books.Read more

Mr Serhan: Interesting choice of word "alternative". It seeks to obscure intent. Academically, the honest term would be "Creationism" or by extension "Intelligent Design".

Your deliberate obscuring of the ID agenda reflects the same ham-fisted tactics exposed in Kitzmiller v. Dover. Also known as the Panda Trial, its hallmark was the shoddy legal and scientific tactics employed by the Dover Board of Education in trying to force religion into the Science curriculum, where -through special pleading - the hucksters who promote ID can claim prestige they have not not earned.

Want to teach ID in public schools? Then, follow academic tradition and do it in Comparative Religion courses. Read more

"There is to be no discussion of so-called Western values in China’s universities."

Major bookstores in Shanghai and Beijing are full of all manner of Western politics and philosophy, including many very pro-captalist thinkers and a great number of books of advice from Western CEOs. Most Chinese I've met who have studied Western political thinkers know their stuff just as well as most who do so in the West, and I went to a very high tier school for political science. Your characterization significantly overstates the case. Read more

What “there is no discussion of western values” really means is there should be no criticisms against the Chinese Communist Party based on values such as democracy, liberty and human rights, as these are western values not Chinese . It is said to be a directive from the CCP to the universities and the media. This is an example of how the Chinese government plays with the idea of nationalism when it seeks to justify its policies. Read more

In a word, Patten is saying that a role of universities is to seek after truth.

However, universities also have a role in social responsibility - not least because they are funded by society in large measure. Why should society pay for universities that are socially irresponsible?

A critical role in social responsibility is the search for reconciliation.

Yes: Truth and Reconciliation.

An ancient university inevitably has a history linked to actions that the modern world sees as wrong. It therefore behoves that university to confront the truth of those wrong actions and to seek reconciliation at the very least where those actions in the past have reverberations into the present.

The academic mind is well and truly closed if it seeks truth without reconciliation. Read more

Dear Chris, Nice effort to raise a debate. Issue is important as we are proceeding towards an economic growth and university KPI linked education system. This has modified the method and process of intellectual and scholarly exchange, sometimes under the lobbying of economic agents or political agents. Since the debate or scholarly engagement is more abused in social science or domains which are unlike science, there is always a chance to greed or ignorance of intentions. Both are dangerous. The only remedy, I would presume, is going back to the earlier era and set values and disciplines as pre-condition of scholarly freedom and engagement. Setting that is issue of culture of university and not only the norm of university.

In addition, examples from only one country would show biased approach. There can be examples from other universities and other countries as well. Read more

Patten deliberately repeats the mis-characterization of the Rhodes, Woodrow Wilson, et al controversies by saying misguided people want to "..expunge the names of those who fail to pass today's test of political correctness .." conjuring the dystopia of Orwell. In fact, these people he references, far from wanting to expunge, want a full and frank discussion of these figures to put them into their historical context. It is also telling that Mr Patten considers Rhodes' only transgression is to fail a test of "political correctness". Is this Rhodes only misdeed, to run afoul of some people's frivolous insistence on political correctness ? Read more

Australian universities were undermined by the changes introduced by John Button and John Dawkins which regarded the universities as the and-maiden of industry, producing the human cogs for an economy which already existed. This necessarily inhibits creative thought and research as to what might be a better society with different technologies. It is an unfortunate fact that most university vice chancellors fell into line behind the government's policy. Read more

Why does Patton say what he says in para 9? By listing his own ideas on what is not permissible, he gives a platform to the very people he argues against to list their's.Political correctness is not new, and the only answer to it is for everyone to have their own say, and for everyone to have the right to listen.Fredom of speech is meaningless if I am not allowed to hear for myself. Read more

Mr. Patten describes a phenomenon that can be observed not only in HK and the UK, but in many Western institutions of so-called higher learning which seem to have adopted the neo-con belief that bstudents are their customers that need to be served and pleased but not bothered by strenuous mental exercises, like thknking themselves rather than let self-appointed 'professionals' think for them ... a dagerous development, I believe! Read more

What is disturbing is the way some students wish to obliterate the past instead of confronting it. You do not confront it by obliterating it. What is just as disturbing is the way they accept the endowment coin but refuse the man. You can't do that and claim moral ground.

Universities should have some backbone and show them the door if they dont like the heritage, apart from anything else the heritage is not the students, it is that of the university and it is students that apply to the university not the other way around Read more

We feel our comments may be a little biased, as we were victim's of Mrs., T's Hong Kong Policy.However, surely part of the problem both in the UK and US is the Universities' are selling their services at considerable profit.i.e., they seem to have lost sight of education and pursue policies of the only thing that counts.We have academics teaching peoples rites must be curtailed so we may pursue insane policies.Corporations which until recently were obliged to accept the products produced by these institutions seem to be moving to the military system of in house training and promoting from within after time in the field and ranks.Where as the Universities have been promoting mob rule, i.e., just shout the opposition down.Hence, the Universities may find they have to sober up and return to encouraging free thinking and free expression. Read more

"Of course, some ideas – incitement of racial hatred, gender hostility, or political violence – are anathema in every free society. Liberty requires some limits.."Is this "limit" not what is being established at universities, by faculty and students in the West and government in China? The author's complaint is that the "limit" is just too far into intolerance of opposing views to suit his taste. Racial hatred, gender hostility and political violence too need to be tolerated ... and then roundly and soundly opposed. Not limited in the self-contradicting manner found in this essay.Read more

I agree with many other comments made here, but I the one that most struck me is your's Mr. Michael Booth. While reading the article I had the same thought. Unless the speech presents a "clear and present" danger to life or property, then it must be acceptable within the academic sphere. There are few if any speech within the university context that I would accept as "requiring limits." That speech may very well be "anathema" to some, perhaps even to the speaker, but the characteristic of being "anathema" is insufficient under the rule of law to forbid it. Read more

Chris Patten should be commended for his apt defence of the institutions of learning. What he says about the challenge to academic freedom and the insidious intrusion of political correctness is right. For centuries, the universities have been the hallmarks of knowledge creation and learning. It is one of the major contributors to society's improved standard of living.

However, all is not well within the Ivory Towers. In 1982, a book was published "A Nation at Risk". In 1992, a book was published "A Nation Still around Risk", which defined the failure and decline of the American educational system. Today, more than 30 years after the first book was written, America is still at risk. Fortunately the general education system in Europe is much better.

Over the past 34 years, Americans from all walks of life, including people like Bill Gates, have tried to fix the education system with limited success. To a large extent, it has been an exercise similar to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It is a sad case of good people locked into a broken and outdated system, much like the American political system.

It is time to reinvent education. Having served as a University Vice President, and the President of a University Development Institute for 10 years, I had the distinct privilege of talking to a great many University Presidents about the future of learning. I asked them if they had a plain piece of paper to structure and operate what they thought a University should be, would it be the same as it is now? Not one of these Presidents said they would advocate for the existing University model. However, they regretfully stated the required changes could never be accepted or passed by the academic elite who run the Universities.

It is a sad reflection that the educational system operates on much the same principles used by Aristotle and Plato. And while that worked fine in their days, it is out of touch with today's realities. Cognitive learning experts would agree the fundamental teaching systems and concepts are badly out of date and cheat our new generations from gaining access to and optimizing their learning opportunities and potential. To a large extent, the education system is still in the horse and buggy whip age.

While the original principles of academic freedom and knowledge acquisition should remain enshrined in the academic system, they should not be used to protect the academic elite from meeting their obligations to students and society.

'Universities should be trusted to exercise that degree of control themselves'

Yes; but right now some seem to be unsure of what should be controlled, and how to do that.

The 'safe space' argument is both infantile and pathetic. Ask any refugee who's lately landed on an Aegean shore. By comparison, most - not all, but most - students in the US and UK are pampered and privileged as Royal Corgis.

Absolutely, one function of a university is to challenge and get students to question fundamental beliefs - and see some as prejudices. At very least, to construct better defenses of their present positions. No challenge, no point, in a university. Read more

I agree with everything,but i can not avoid but notice the lack of proposals,of solutions.Despite the truth of everything you describe,you fail to address the underlying reason for all this,which is in my opinion greed.The enemy within.We need to change,education must be as you describe it ,but the question is who s going to pay?and as long as people believe that they shouldnt pay taxes ,but at the same time expect education systems to be free of any influence(that being from government,markets,multinationals,or whatever).Academia today is full of implants from the "free markets",people who lack the morality one would expect from an academic.Universities that serve purposes of forces of these markets,people who get money to teach kids how to become the next vulture.How to stop this?i dont know.i m only pointing to the cause ,sticking the finger deeper.Because this has to do with personal decisions,with a stance in life,with principles and most probably in today;s world a lot of problems and pain.Because we(??) set up a world against our instincts.we followed what we knew was propaganda,brain washing,and immoral.All with the excuse that "If i dont do it,someone else will"....Read more

The sort of borderline student and academic nonsense Patten describes has been around forever. Is he really saying it's worse today than in the 60's. Rhodes is still there unless he'd noticed. What's much more serious in Britain is the assault on academic freedom by his erstwhile Conservative colleagues with their cuts to education, huge increase in student fees, and direction by the likes of Gove in how subjects should be taught. Read more

This "nonsense" to which you so blithely comment has not "been around forever." In fact, it is a modern phenomenon that I associate with the success of the politically correct movement, and with the near-worship of multiculturalism. Read more

This article is very relevant to the debate surrounding nationalism going on in India and government's overreach into our academic institutions. In fact. reading several paragraphs of this article, I felt Chris Patten is going to refer the recent events in some of premier universities in India, where dissent (ideas different from the ideologies of ruling government) has been criminalized and the overreach of HRD minister has resulted in suicide of a PhD scholar. Read more

You are misinformed. The PHD scholar was punished by his own college administration, because he beat up some students. BTW, the students support Terrorists and Maoists. This is anti-humanity. And has nothing to do with govt of the day. Even Chris Patten will oppose Osama Remembrance Day and Holocaust Tribute Day in Oxford. Read more

The modern day value of a costly educational system, is for the purpose of securing some financial advancement, through the preparation a graduate with the credentials for employment. The concept of credentials, and the preparation for acceptance into a useful and practical harmony of commerce, is an experience that is external to the idealism expressed by Chancellor Patten. Universities are the entrance gates to political power, financial power, professions, and to some degree almost all jobs that have more applicants than availability. In the law of supply and demand in the labour market, the filter of a University diploma acts as a suppressant upon the supply, and makes the demand more costly.Therefore the idealization of critical dissent in a University system, no longer pays for itself in an educational system that is designed to formulate careers. Education today is computer oriented rather than teacher oriented. Classes must be productive which means the minimum cost for the most efficient transmission of education, or where prestige is important, then it is the maximum cost for the transmission of pure, elitist education.For myself, when I moderate a group discussion, I abhor immediate and excessive agreement. I will consciously promote an opposite point of view, irrespective of my own opinion, just to promote thought. That however is the prerogative of retired seniors who want to be objective and have fun thinking rather than worrying whether the exam score will affect our future. Read more

"Therefore the idealization of critical dissent in a University system, no longer pays for itself in an educational system that is designed to formulate careers." - I would encourage you to explain when critical dissent ever did pay for itself. It's a social necessity, not an economic one.

As a life long 'career employee'and 'model consumer', the best thing I ever did for myself and the people around me was return to school for a liberal education degree. No bean counter will ever be able to assign a dollar value to that on a ledger, which is entirely the point. Read more

Chancellor of every university in the city sound pretty good, but the truth of the matter is that there were only two higher institutions that confer degrees when Hong Kong was under British rule, and one of them was created by Chinese compatriots. For a city of over 7 millions and there were only two universities, that's colonialism for you. Read more

All three pillars of society (cultural, economic and governmental) should be free from undue influence of the others. In the east the government dominates culture and economics and the end result will be a repeat of of the fall of the USSR. In the west, on the other hand, economic power has corrupted the other two spheres with elected politicians being little more than corporate representative and with corporations corrupting the research and curriculums of education in exchange for grants and lucrative employment options for professors. But little is so ugly as the middle east (Saudi, Iran) where culture dominates the other two spheres. Read more

It is not ridiculous. During British rule of HK, universities in HK are not under threat from government to take away their academic freedom let alone interfere the appointment of staff in universities. Under Chinese rule, China through its proxy CY government has constantly interfered the internal administration of universities especially using political standpoint as criteria to appoint university staff. Since there was academic freedom in HK under British rule, your implicit assumption that HK has no academic freedom under Pattern's rule is simply wrong. Read more

Really interesting article. We have been working to develop a series of practical workshops that offer Universities the chance to provide their students with practical examples of sustainability and development in Africa. Immersive learning. For universities to be able to offer funded trips that widen horizons, teach adaptability and inspire their students to become global thinkers would be incredible. To learn more http://www.responsiblesafaricompany.com/rsc-universities/mice-2/ Read more

What do you think of Western Universities which are now in a marathon to crown oppressors, dictators and mass murderers of Africans with Honoris Causa degrees ? Does it contribute to democracy and societal freedom too ? Do you think it is also in the realm of academic liberty and freedom ! Your universities have become a place where criminals can freely hold conferences and seminars to whitewash their crimes...!

In my opinion, not westerners should take a closer interest at what is happening in Chinese universities, rather the opposite should happen: Everyone else should take closer interest in what is happening in western universities, especially with regard to supporting dictators in Africa, and also discriminatory system in your universities. Fool none ! Read more

Thank you Mr. Patten for your article on academic freedom in universities.

I would like to say first that I am one of your admirers both when you were a government minister and later as the last British governor of Hong Kong.

Your comments about free speech and university autonomy in China are not in question and I would endorse most of what you have said. However, I think your comments about the situation in Hong Kong is out of touch and need correcting.

I have been living in Hong Kong since 2004 and I believe I do have a pretty good idea what is going on over here. What you read in the press, especially the foreign press, is not always a true and accurate representation of what is happening here.

In the pro-democracy and Occupy Central protests of 2014/2015, even school children were used as political tools and asked to skip their classes and join the protests against the government by some teachers and principals.

We have Benny Tai, one of the leaders of Occupy Central and a Professor of Law at HKU, openly encouraging or telling students to break the law in the name of democracy. It has also been reported that he and his university colleagues have been channeling money to support the occupation of the Central districts of Hong Kong.

I have visited the occupied sites in both Admiralty and Mong Kok and can certainly verify that they were well-supported financially and equipped with plentiful supplies of food, water, blankets, tents, propaganda materials and other necessities.

It is the politicising of schools and universities by some academics and teachers in the first place that the government is responding in kind. I am sorry to say there is now no discipline in the universities and students just charge into governing council meetings shouting abuse and injuring council members who don't agree with them.

There is now an even more worrying tendency where young radicals and some students are literally taking Benny Tai's advice that it is alright to break the law to re-dress any issues that concern them.

This happened in Mong Kok about three weeks ago where the most vicious violence not seen for decades against the police occurred. It all started innocently when police were questioning illegal street hawkers for selling food in their normal line of duty. A radical group believing in violence and calling themselves 'Hong Kong Indigenous' and some students seize the opportunity and attacked police with bricks, firebombs, refuse bins, metal rods, glass bottles and whatever they can get hold of.

Initially, only a handful of transport police were at the scene and were overwhelmed by the vicious violence and numbers of rioters. When a badly injured police officer was knocked down onto the floor and his life was in danger by the rioting mob, one of his fellow officers pointed a gun up and fired several shots into the air to scare off the attackers.

As a result, over 90 police officers were injured, some of them seriously after being hit by bricks and other lethal weapons. They were only trying to carry out their normal line of duties and to keep the peace and retain law and order.

This is the reality of the situation in Hong Kong.

I am not saying everything is rosy and perfect in Hong Kong. You rightly pointed out the possible abduction recently of a British citizen and several Hong Kong residents by mainland agents. Although this is an isolated case, it is nevertheless very worrisome and a possible breach of the one country two systems status that we all enjoy and treasure very much in Hong Kong.

Apart from these isolated cases, we do have free speech and enjoy a high degree of freedom in Hong Kong. We have a very good and respected legal system inherited from the British. At the moment, we only have partial democracy but hope to achieve full democracy in the near future. However, what our young generation don't quite understand is you will not achieve full democracy through the use of force, violence and intimidation, especially when dealing with a country like China. Nor will most sensible and law-abiding citizens of Hong Kong support you.

Lastly, we have one of the best and most tolerant police force in the world. I certainly would not want to exchange them for police on the mainland nor even the NYPD! Read more

I read your article with interest and I can tell you right away what you said is not true.- Participation in OC is on a voluntary basis and students or protestors are simply exercising their independent thinking to make such a decision. I also went to Mongkok, Admiralty and Causeway Bay and talked to students and protestors. Their general response is that they did not want a "fake" democracy to be imposed on HK. - In your article, you seem to portrayed that there is a group of people behind organized everything. Again, this is factually incorrect. The OC movement is very disorganized and divided into many factions. Indeed, Benny Tai lost the leadership position and students quickly took over. Protestors however are somehow glued together by one objective: say NO to fake democracy.- I am a HK living in HK since birth and did not affiliate to any group. I just report what I see here. Please do not echo Chinese government's propaganda here. Read more

I wonder what his source is? Oh, that's right, he didn't even bother explain where he got his information from! For someone who told his students to take a hike when they queried one of the uni's decisions, I don't think he is exactly the most qualified guy to talk about this issue. The fact that there have been so much conflicts in the HK university scene is that people are entitled as much freedom as one would wish that students challenge just about every decision the governing body of universities do without having to worry about being disciplined even if they constantly use violence to express their so called stance! I would like to see someone showing the same kind of "freedom" in other places like the US or the UK? Read more

I read your article with interest and what do you mean by source. Mr. Pattern is expressing concern on academic freedom in HK. Regarding the students' violent behavior, you need to know why students behaved like that. China through his proxy CY has kept on interfering the academic freedom of universities in HK, using political standpoint rather than academic ability to choose university staff, employing thugs to go to university campus to intimidate students. The list can go on. This is the reason why students are using violence. You need to know the cause before you started to blame the students. Read more

I think, the imbalances you are seeing and describing in academia, are the direct result of ''the long march through the institutions'': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions

The British security services were rightly concerned about your Marxist professor, Mr. Patten.

Marxism is a highly destructive, aggressive, and authoritarian revolutionary ideology.

Kant and ''Freedom of Speech'', in my opinion, are the only true antidote against dangerous and unnatural ideologies such as Marxism, Fascism, etc., and the only way to prevent these ideologies to take over entire societies: ''The key to throwing off these chains of mental immaturity is reason. There is hope that the entire public could become a force of free thinking individuals if they are free to do so. Why? There will always be a few people, even among the institutional "guardians," who think for themselves. They will help the rest of us to "cultivate our minds." Kant shows himself a man of his times when he observes that "a revolution may well put an end to autocratic despotism . . . or power-seeking oppression, but it will never produce a true reform in ways of thinking." The recently completed American Revolution had made a great impression in Europe; Kant cautions that new prejudice will replace the old and become a new leash to control the "great unthinking masses."'' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answering_the_Question:_What_is_Enlightenment%3F#Basic_understanding

Thank you, again, Mr. Patten for being one of the few institutional guardians, who thinks for himself, and helps the rest of us to cultivate our minds. Read more

Don't they call these "safe places" churches? Or party meetings? University should be a safe place to be exposed to things that assault their sense of what's moral and appropriate, not places to hide from such ideas. Read more

Ironically, it was the British who created the political system that made easy academic censorship. When the communists took over Hong Kong, they also inherited the colonial law that the governor shall be the principal of all universities of the city state. There is no need to elaborate its effect on academic autonomy. Read more

Apparently, you did not understand what is happening in HK. During British rule, universities in HK were free from interferences from government. Governor such as Christ Pattern only performed a ceremonial role. However, after Communists took over HK, the role of government changed and the objective is to interfere the internal administration of universities in HK, appoint those that exhibit loyalty to Communists and branded students who demanded genuine democracy in HK as foreign puppets etc. I think you owe the readers here an explanation why systems created by British is so easy to breed censorship. Read more

Most universities in the U.S. have adopted a socialist mentality believing the collective is more important than the individual. There is NOT a collective RIGHT for you to "not be offended." In institutions that were created to challenge ideas, universities are merely mouthpieces for the socialist world system that wants to destroy free speech and eliminate individualism. These beliefs are in direct opposition to the constitution, and just as Jefferson illegally suspended habeas corpus during the civil war, so do the universities intimidate their customers with "political correctness."

Everyone forgets that the student is a customer paying for a product Read more

Mr. Patten has shared a valuable perspective. "On Liberty", "Aereopagitica" and other works extolling the ideal of free speech and the benefits gained by examination of all sides to an argument, should be required reading for college students and faculty. The success of the Western Liberal program is partly predicated upon the habits of educated people judging the merits of positions for themselves, judgements based upon examination of facts, logic and historical perspective. It should be troubling to all of us when universities, which should be centers of thought and thought-training, are allowed to decay into indoctrination camps. Many of the positions stated in the comments to this article could stand a bit of disinfecting through holding up to the light. For example, paying a little bit of attention to actual history class would have helped, as I believe it was Lincoln that suspended habeas corpus during the civil war. Read more

I think this article would be strengthened by providing some examples of the kind of the censorial culture being derided in universities today. In their absence, this argument reads like a swipe against the challenges being made to white supremacist power structures and narratives within the environments of elite academic institutions, which have been funded by wealthy white men who made their fortunes from a profoundly rigged system, in which they alone claimed rights to citizenship, with everyone else existing solely to serve their interests. Roosevelt, Rhodes, Washington and Churchill were all proponents and beneficiaries of this race-based caste system and deserve to be called out and reimagined within the context of modern values, for how they chose to live their lives and exercise power, as men who built vast personal fortunes on slavery, colonialism, genocide and race-based exploitation and who, despite their rhetoric about freedom, equality and the application of Enlightenment values, made it very clear though their lives and leadership that these ideas did not extend to the vast majority of people in the world. It seems to me that arguments like the one expressed here by Mr Patton have more to do with protecting white fragility in the face of challenges to white male dominance by those who represent the groups traditionally reduced to chattel and low cost labour in a world order built for and by white wealthy men. Read more

Is it then your position that Washington, Roosevelt and Churchill ought to have declined to serve in any position whatsoever, on the grounds that they were not "worthy"? Are you prepared to accept the consequences thereof? Or that Rhodes should not have endowed his scholarship and the recipients should have refused it, on the grounds that the funds were tainted?It is very convenient to see the world in black and white. It is less easy to live so pure a life and exercise power free from compromise of every kind. Read more

PS On Air: The Super Germ Threat

NOV 2, 2016

In the latest edition of PS On
Air
, Jim O’Neill discusses how to beat antimicrobial resistance, which
threatens millions of lives, with Gavekal Dragonomics’ Anatole Kaletsky
and Leonardo Maisano of
Il Sole 24 Ore.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Sign up to receive newsletters about what's being discussed on Project Syndicate.

EmailReceive our Sunday newsletterA weekly collection of our most discussed columnsReceive our PS On Point newsletterStay informed of the world's leading opinions on global issues

Why not register an account with us, too? You'll be able to follow individual authors (to receive notifications whenever they publish new articles) and subscribe to more specific, topic-based newsletters.

Project Syndicate provides readers with original, engaging, and thought-provoking commentaries by global leaders and thinkers. By offering incisive perspectives from those who are shaping the world’s economics, politics, science, and culture, Project Syndicate has created an unrivaled global venue for informed public debate.